Showing posts with label slavery. Show all posts
Showing posts with label slavery. Show all posts

Saturday, May 28, 2011

Explosive History: Southern Democrats and Black Genocide.






In any recent election, it is estimated that 90% of blacks vote Democrat. Why?



A while back I mentioned, in a post whose title now escapes me, about black worker displacement during the Great Depression. If a white man needed a job and a black man had a job, the black worker was fired and the white worker was given the job.



It should be remembered that during the Depression food shortages were common, despite the agrarian nature of the nation, because many crops were destroyed in order to maintain commodity prices. "The Agricultural Adjustment Act (AAA) (Pub.L. 73-10, enacted May 12, 1933) restricted agricultural production in the New Deal era by paying farmers to reduce crop area. Its purpose was to reduce crop surplus so as to effectively raise the value of crops, thereby giving farmers relative stability again.[when?] The farmers were paid subsidies by the federal government for letting a portion of their fields lie fallow. The money for these subsidies was generated through an exclusive tax on companies which processed farm products. The Act created a new agency, the Agricultural Adjustment Administration, to oversee the distribution of the subsidies. It is considered the first modern U.S. farm bill." ( Gosh, isn't government incompetence great? )



Now, during our Depression, the United States was busy busting the Soviet Union's chops over the Holodomor famine in the Ukraine. A modern Russian researcher by the name of Boris Borisov was a bit irritated by this and decided to examine the American Great Depression in an attempt to discover the number of thoise who perished between roughly 1930 and 1940. Borisov concluded, using some pretty good data along with conservative extrapolation, that about 7 and one half million people died of starvation and other causes during the Depression.



A disproportionate number of those would have been blacks, due to the black worker displacement of the time. The Democrat Roosevelt administration obviously did not care much about the excessive number of starving blacks. (They were only too happy, however, to train blacks as houseboys though. That was a WPA project of the period.)



The main premise of this post is that Southern Democrats, and Democrats in general, are, in fact, responisble for the deaths of more American blacks than were Jews killed by the Nazi's.



There are some complicating factors involved when trying to pin down the exact number of blacks that were killed. One problem is trying to determine the actual black population of pre-Civil War America. Prior to emancipation, blacks were considered personal property and taxed.



People did not like paying property taxes in 1850 any more than we do today, so it is no stretch to assume that large plantation owners under reported the number of slaves they owned. Another problem is that many pre-1900 court houses were made of wood and many were destroyed by fire, as were the records contained therein. Nonetheless, one can conservatively conclude a 10%-15% under reporting of blacks on the census.



If we check census data we see that in 1860 the racial breakdown was 26.9 million whites to 4.4 million blacks. Thus, blacks were 14% of the population. In 1870 the breakdown was 33.6 million whites to 4.9 million blacks. Despite horrific losses during the war the white population had increased 20% while the black population during the same period increased by only 10%. (After 1865, there would have been no need to continue to under report blacks so a much greater black population count would have been expected for the 1870 census--though we do see a spike on the 1880 census.)



I'll explain why these next stats are important in a minute. The white population had increased by 23% from 1870 to 1880 while the black population jumped by 26% from 1870 to 1880. (I'll frame this in context with the Compromise of 1877 shortly)



It was well known by the founding fathers that blacks had a prolific reproduction rate. This resulted in the Three-Fifths compromise developed during the 1787 Philadelphia Convention. Had the slave population been counted as 100%, slave states would have had greater representation in the House and Electoral College---and we can't have that now can we?



As Thomas Jefferson observed about blacks: "They are more ardent after their female: but love seems with them to be more an eager desire, than a tender delicate mixture of sentiment and sensation. Their griefs are transient. Those numberless afflictions, which render it doubtful whether heaven has given life to us in mercy or in wrath, are less felt, and sooner forgotten with them. In general, their existence appears to participate more of sensation than reflection." (I.E. They'll screw anything in sight) We tend to think that there were more male slaves than female slaves, but the numbers were somewhat equal.



After the end of the Civil War, black men and women should have gotten together, staked a land claim and began having children. Five to ten children per family was not uncommon in those days.



40 Acres and a mule.



Union General Sherman's Special Field Orders No. 15 confiscated 400,000 acres of land along the Atlantic coast and divided it into 40 acre parcels that were to be settled by roughly 18,000 freed slaves. It was mostly a useless order since it was revoked later that same year (1865) by President Andrew Johnson, a Democrat turned National Union Party member, who succeeded the Republican Lincoln after he was assinated. ( In 1864 Johnson joined the National Union Party that was the name chosen by the Republican party for the 1864 election. The name change was used to attract War Democrats. Johnson was basically a RINO, having swtched parties for political expediency.)



As an aside, although I think slave reparations are an idiotic idea today, I might get on board with having a lottery and giving 18,000 blacks, who could prove they had ancestors alive during the civil war, a 40 acre parcel of land and a car since it's obvious they got screwed on that deal. At any rate, it's just another way the blacks got screwed by the Dems.



Before continuing, I would offer that one point to consider is that most blacks were illiterate and generally unskilled, so, releasing millions of slaves into the general population in a post Civil War environment was bound to generate some problems. Was there any evidence that blacks were murdered in quantity and were committing serious crimes due to various types of mistreatment (and due to the fact they were undisciplined savages)? Actually, yes.



The Freedmen's Bureau:




The Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen and Abandoned Lands, known more simply as the Freedmen's Bureau was established in March of 1865 and was discontinued by President Grant in 1872. The Bureau was set up to help newly freed slaves with food, clothing, HEALTH CARE, and jobs.



Goodl ol' RINO President Johnson vetoed a bill for an increase in the power of the Bureau in 1866. One thing the Freedmen's Bureau did do was document various crimes committed by blacks and it documented some of the mistreatment of blacks. (Link) I'm including the appendix so you can see the scale of violence and murder committed against blacks as well as the crimes they committed. Keep in mind that the appendix is but a small percentage of the overall violence that was happening at that time. You can scroll through the appendix and view it later in detail if you wish.



Alabama



Georgia



Louisiana



North Carolina



South Carolina



Tennessee



Texas



Virginia



Washington D. C.




Basically, southern Democrats had a field day killing blacks. Remember also that with technology what it was in those days, it would be a simple matter for a white to kill a black family in a rural area and make a claim on their property or force them to sign the property over and kill them. (As many blacks would not understand what they were signing)



It is probable that as many as one million blacks were killed by whites during Reconstruction. The census data seems to support this. So where are all the remains of the dead blacks? Growing up in the South, I can remember the local paper frequently reporting on old unmarked colored cemeteries being discovered. The remains were usually relocated.



It appears that the black population was attempting to make a comeback between the 1870 and 1880 census, but alas, this was not to be. The increasing black population came under the scrutiny of the Southern Democrats.



The Compromise of 1877



The Compromise of 1877 basically threw the disputed 1876 Presidential election to Republican Rutherford B. Hayes in exchange for the removal of Federal troops from the South and adding at least one Southern Democrat on Haye's cabinet. Thus, Southern Democrats, usually via the KKK, continued the black slaughter. Now, I documented in a previous post about the fact that there were several thousand blacks in the Klan at one time. Most were used as spies so the Klan could keep track of the blacks. Also, at the height of Klan power they had three million members at a time when the total U.S. population was under a hundred million or so.



To further keep the brothers down, when white Democrats regained control of the South in the 1870's they began to pull funding for black schools. By the 1890's Jim Crow laws were keeping segregation in full force. However, when the Democrats figured out that under segregation blacks were getting rich and gaining political clout, something had to be done....so, later, the Democrats went in for desegregation.



In the interim, we have the liberal Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood. Sanger was a big advocate of eugenics. One of her better known quotes: " It is said that a fish as large as a man has a brain no larger than the kernel of an almond. In all fish and reptiles where there is no great brain development, there is also no conscious sexual control. The lower down in the scale of human development we go the less sexual control we find. It is said that the aboriginal Australian, the lowest known species of the human family, just a step higher than the chimpanzee in brain development, has so little sexual control that police authority alone prevents him from obtaining sexual satisfaction on the streets." (This might be a good time for y'all to check the rape stats for the Congo and Haiti.)



And we have this gem: "In 1939 Sanger teamed with Mary Woodward Reinhardt, secretary of the newly formed BCFA, to secure a large donor to fund an educational campaign to teach African-American women in the South about contraception. Sanger, Reinhardt and Sanger's secretary, Florence Rose, drafted a report on "Birth Control and the Negro," skillfully using language that appealed both to eugenicists fearful of unchecked black fertility and progressives committed to shepherding African-Americans into middle-class culture. The report stated that "[N]egroes present the great problem of the South," as they are the group with "the greatest economic, health and social problems," and outlined a practical birth control program geared toward a population characterized as largely illiterate and that "still breed carelessly and disastrously," a line borrowed from a June 1932 Birth Control Review article by W.E.B. DuBois. Armed with this paper, Reinhardt initiated contact between Sanger and Albert Lasker (soon to be Reinhardt's husband), who pledged $20,000 starting in Nov. 1939. ("Birth Control and the Negro," July 1939, Lasker Papers)"



We also can't forget about Rebecca Felton. (See this LINK)



Yep, no doubt, them colored folks have to go. Thanks to Margaret Sanger about 1,876 black babies are aborted each day. It has been estimated that since 1973 black women have had roughly 16 million abortions. (Thank God)



Time to get down to brass tacks. How many blacks have Southern Democrats, liberals and Democrats in general killed?



Currently, the U.S. population is estimated at around 305 million, with 14% being black. That is about 42 million 700 thousand blacks. Without Democrat efforts to control the black population, they should currently make up about one third of the U.S. population or about 102 million people. Thus, Democrats are responsible for the deaths/non-births of about 59 million blacks. The Nazis were alleged, and I mean alleged, to have killed six million Jews, while Stalin and Mao had death counts in the 40-60 million range, so the Dems are up there in numbers with their heroes Stalin and Mao. Yet, 90% of blacks still vote Democrat." Silly niggers, brains are for white people. " The GOP should just stop trying to court the black vote. We already have more ignorant people than we need.

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, May 11, 2011

Distorted History: Lincoln never freed the slaves.

 

There are some historians here on OS who are aware of this, but it is not something most folks think about today. As an aside, this post is basically a cut and paste from a Stormfront post by another author which I am editing/adding to,  to get to the meat of my point.

 

The Emancipation Proclamation did not actually free the slaves. To wit:

 

"That on the first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, all persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of a State, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free; and the Executive Government of the United States, including the military and naval authority thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of such persons, and will do no act or acts to repress such persons, or any of them, in any efforts they may make for their actual freedom."

 

 

Lincoln's proclamation would have no more effect than if President Obama issued a proclamation that all Israeli sex slaves were hereby freed.

 

For decades, conservatives/Republicans have used the issue of Lincoln freeing the slaves to make the point that they aren't racist. They need to knock that crap off and face reality. Abe Lincoln never gave a hoot about blacks---in fact, he didn't really care for them.

 

Part of this could be due to the fact that Abe was almost killed by a group of blacks when he was 19. (The more things change, the more they stay the same. 19th century black crime stats weren't that much different than today.) Quote:  "When he was nineteen, still residing in Indiana, he made his first trip upon a flat-boat to New-Orleans. He was a hired hand merely; and he and a son of the owner, without other assistance, made the trip. The nature of part of the cargo-load, as it was called – made it necessary for them to linger and trade along the Sugar coast – and one night they were attacked by seven Negroes with intent to kill and rob them. They were hurt some in the melee, but succeeded in driving the Negroes from the boat, and then “cut cable” “weighed anchor” and left."

 

Then we have Lincoln's own words on the matter:

 

"In the Lincoln-Douglas debates, which took place in 1858, while debating in Ottowa, Illinois on August 21st of that year, Mr. Lincoln stated, quite plainly, that: "I have no disposition to introduce political and social equality between the white and black races. There is a physical difference between the two, which in my judgment will probably forever forbid their living together on terms of respect, social and political equality, and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there should be a superiority somewhere, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position;"

 

"Lest one be tempted to think that this Lincolnian sentiment was a mere abberation, a slip of the tongue on his part, let's note Lincoln's comments in his speech at Charleston, Illinois on September 18, 1858. Here, dealing again with the same question, Lincoln said: "I will say then, that I am not nor have ever been in favor of bringing about in any way, the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I am not, nor have I ever been in favor of making voters of the negroes, or jurors, or qualifying them to hold office, or having them to marry with white people...there must be the position of superior and inferior, that I as much as any other man am in favor of the superior position being assigned to the white man." And he repeated, again, this exact same sentiment in the debate in Quincy, Illinois on October 13th."

 

And lastly........To start with, says Bennett, Lincoln was a crude bigot who habitually used the N word and had an unquenchable thirst for blackface-minstrel shows and demeaning "darky" jokes. He supported the noxious pre-Civil War "Black Laws," which stripped African Americans of their basic rights in his native Illinois, as well as the Fugitive Slave Act, which compelled the return to their masters of those who had escaped to free soil in the North. But Bennett's main theme is that Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation was only "a ploy" designed to keep as many slaves in bondage as possible until Lincoln could build support for his plan for ending slavery: "colonization," a preposterous scheme to ship the black population either to Africa or South America. His fondest dream, Bennett writes, was of a "lily-white America without Native Americans, African Americans and Martin Luther Kings." (Can I hear an A MEN!!!!!!!)

 

Honestly, to repeat, my fellow conservatives need to stop touting Lincoln as some kind of idol for supposedly freeing the slaves. If you are a conservative and you aren't racist, you'll need to cite other proof that the Republican party is the party of inclusion and diversity--both big mistakes IMO.

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)